Statutory Interpretation Of An Act Of Parliament

1548 Words7 Pages
Statutory interpretation is a procedure executed by judges when understanding an Act of Parliament, which transpires when they are confronted with new components of legislation including definitions which are not distinctly conveyed. The courts retain the responsibility when the implications of that statute are ambiguous to ascertain Parliaments objectives on how the law should be applied. This essay will examine the approaches and methodical rules which direct judges in the interpretation of statutes, referencing and scrutinising pertinent case law, with specific emphasis on R v Bentham , whereby the wording within the legislation was deliberated by the House of Lords who eventually quashed the case. Furthermore, the essay will analyse and explore additional instruments that assist courts with statutory interpretation in case like R v Bentham , which comprise of internal and external aids.

Statutory interpretation consists of four approaches directing judges on interpreting legislation. The literal rule exercises standard meanings of words, despite that it could result in absurd and injustice judgements, consequently the golden rule takes effect. This rule emerges from the literal rule, yet it avoids absurdity. Furthermore, there is a rule that considers the ‘mischief’ Parliament proposed to address, which is the mischief rule and is the closest rule to the purposive approach, a contemporary approach that entails judges determining what they understand what Parliament
Open Document